“2) Was there anything about God or Jesus in the article?”
Is there any mention of God or Jesus in Esther or Song of Solomon?
“There is no meat, no edification.”
So Esther isn’t edifying? The Song of Solomon isn’t edifying?
“3) So what is the purpose of the article?”
To tell you about something you previously didn’t know.
To tell you about something you previously didn’t know.
It is a puff piece to promote an individual. There was no meat to it.
I’m sorry, I could just as well read this article in Peoples Magazine. There is that little content to it. Hope springs eternal that there should be a difference between religious magazines and secular one.
I am not criticizing the man, I am criticizing the article.
My reading skills are the headline, the first paragraph, the last paragraph and then the articles for details if warranted.
The last paragraph is usually the major point the author wants you to remember.
“At ninety, Benedict has lived long enough to see crises erupt, crises engaged, and now the beginning of crises resolved.”
Is that the point? Is it about tribute to Benedict?
The body has a lot of details. Mostly accolades to Benedict.
The author does getting close to the truth a couple of times, but never gets there.
Now, the gem of Benedicts life appears to be, we all need to get back to Scriptural Authority. But we can’t say that plainly, can we? Or is that not the gem?